diversity in global food supplies and the implications for food security

Diversity in global food supplies

and the implications for food security

Colin K. Khoury

Australian Grains Genebank

Horsham, Australia

How many crops feed the world?

Khoury et al. (2015) ITPGRFA Research Study 8 (Rome: FAO).

A simple question?

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2385929

National diets are growing larger and more energy dense

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

National diets are becoming more diverse*

*for crops measured in FAO food supply data

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

National diets are becoming more even*

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

National diets are becoming more similar*

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

calories


Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

1961


Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

1985


Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

2009


Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006


Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

calories

Changing importance of crops in diets

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

• Major cereals, tubers and sugar- centerpiece and still growing

• Oil crops, especially soybean and palm oil-major increases

• Regional cereals, tubers, and oils- marginalizing

• Local crops also declining

Changing relative contribution to diets

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

• Calories:+ rape and mustard (+20,751%), palm oil (+6724%), rice (+232%), potatoes (+37%), grapes (+130%), cottonseed oil (+6250%), maize (+279%), soybean (+943%), olives (+227%), cocoa (+184%)

- wheat (-24%), sugar (-33%), barley (-20%), coconuts (-51%)

• Protein:+ potatoes (+41%), rice (+242%), peas (+105%), maize (+361%)

- wheat (-25%), groundnut (-39%)

• Fat:+ rape and mustard (+18,796%), palm oil (+4040%), cottonseed oil (+2757%), soybean (647%), olives (+152%), sunflower (+281%)

- coconut (-61%), wheat (-42%), groundnut (-77%)

Australian dietary change 1961 to 2009

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

Soybeans are harvested at Fartura Farm, in Mato Grosso state, Brazil – Paulo Fridman/Corbis http://blog.bpmcpa.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Globalization12.png

Drivers: agricultural development

Implications in agricultural systems

Soybeans are harvested at Fartura Farm, in Mato Grosso state, Brazil – Paulo Fridman/Corbis

Neil Palmer/ CIAT

http://www.bento.com/subtop5.html

Global food system

This is the wheat, rice, maize, sugar, palm oil, soybean phase

Triticum, Oryza, Zea, Saccharum, Elaeis, Glycine

This is the

Triticoryzeacchalaeiscine“Triti-co-ryze-accha-laeis-cine”

Crop Wild Relatives

https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/

CWR in global conservation targets

“By 2020, the genetic diversity of

cultivated plants and farmed and

domesticated animals and of wild relatives, including other socio-

economically as well as culturally

valuable species, is maintained, and

strategies have been developed and

implemented for minimizing genetic

erosion and safeguarding their genetic

diversity.”

Convention on Biological Diversity

Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020

Aichi Biodiversity Targets

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300

CWR in global development targets

“By 2020 maintain genetic

diversity of seeds, cultivated plants,

farmed and domesticated animals and

their related wild species,

including through soundly managed

and diversified seed and plant banks

at national, regional and international

levels, and ensure access to and fair

and equitable sharing of benefits

arising from the utilization of genetic

resources and associated traditional

knowledge as internationally agreed”

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Target 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved

nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture

Crop wild relatives are valuable

Aluminium tolerance from

Oryza rufipogon

Salinity tolerance from

Solanum cheesmaniae

Western corn rootworm resistance

from Tripsacum dactyloides

Salinity tolerance from

Helianthus paradoxus

Publications- 2% of citations recorded prior to 1970, 13% in the 1970s, 15% in the 1980s, 32% in the 1990s and 38% 2000-2009 (n=234)

Disease resistance 39%, pest and disease resistance 17%, abiotic stress tolerance 13%, quality improvement 11% yield increase 10%, husbandry

improvement 6%, cytoplasmic male sterility and fertility restorers 4% (Maxted & Kell 2009)

2055

CWR are threatened

Jarvis et al. 2008

Agric. Ecosys. Environ.

126: 13-23.

1950-2000

25

Wild Pecos sunflower Helianthus paradoxusWild squash Cucurbita okeechobeensis subsp.

okeechobeensis

Scrub plum Prunus geniculataTexas wild rice Zizania texana

Including in countries with strong conservation programs

Gather

occurrence data

Make collecting

recommendations

Model

distributions

Process data

Determine gaps

in collections

Taxonomic

Geographic

Ecological

Choose species

or area

81 crop genepools

1076 crop wild relative

taxa (close relatives)

CWR gap analysis method

Crop Wild Relative Global Occurrence Database

http://www.cwrdiversity.org/checklist/cwr-occurrences.php

www.cwrdiversity.org

Distributions of the CWR of pigeonpea

Khoury et al. 2015. Biological Conservation 184: 259-270.

Collecting priorities for the CWR of pigeonpea


Gaps in genebanks for CWR of pigeonpea


Distributions of CWR worldwide

Castañeda-Álvarez et al. 2016 Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. Nature Plants. doi:10.1038/NPLANTS.2016.22

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

High Medium Low No further collectingrecommended

71.1%

13.8%11%

4.2%

Collecting priorities for CWR worldwide


Gaps in genebanks for CWR worldwide


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Number of high priority species (HPS) for collecting per country

Australia’s got under-conserved CWR


Distributions of pigeonpea CWR in Australia


Distributions of rice CWR in Australia


Distributions of sorghum CWR in Australia


Distributions of soybean CWR in Australia


Distributions of CWR in Australia


Gaps in genebanks for Australian CWR


The clock is ticking

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329772-500-australias-epic-scheme-to-farm-its-northern-wilds/#.VBMrW_ldUek

CWR resources

The “primary regions of diversity” of crops


Estimating interdependence in plant genetic resources

“Primary regions of diversity” of crops

International Potato Center (CIP)

High diversity in primary regions

David Cavagnaro

The “primary regions of diversity” of crops


Primary region of diversity of crops

Production quantity (tonnes)

Production quantity (%)

Harvested area (ha)

Harvested area (%)

Production value current million US$)

Production value (%)

Calories (kcal/capita/day)

Calories (%)

Protein (g/capita/day)

Protein (%)

Fat (g/capita/day) Fat (%)

Food weight (g/capita/day)

Food weight (%)

North America 1,919,723 0.9% 213,950 0.3% 1,309.7 2.1% 91.3 1.1% 0.2 0.2% 4.0 1.7% 90.7 2.2%

Central America and Mexico 2,834,726 1.3% 482,965 0.6% 3,345.9 5.3% 261.0 3.3% 1.7 1.8% 23.9 10.4% 51.0 1.3%

Caribbean 2,107,763 1.0% 322,539 0.4% 2,829.6 4.5% 62.7 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 7.1 3.1% 6.7 0.2%

Andes 2,365,732 1.1% 717,305 1.0% 1,134.0 1.8% 96.7 1.2% 2.9 3.0% 0.3 0.1% 215.3 5.3%

Tropical South America 2,443,372 1.1% 353,714 0.5% 3,139.7 5.0% 241.7 3.0% 1.8 1.9% 24.9 10.9% 61.7 1.5%

Temperate South America 29,492 0.0% 1,596 0.0% 190.3 0.3% 1.0 0.0% 0.2 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 1.7 0.0%

West Africa 2,517,561 1.1% 715,049 1.0% 573.3 0.9% 254.3 3.2% 3.4 3.6% 15.3 6.7% 63.7 1.6%

Central Africa 2,403,161 1.1% 672,913 0.9% 480.3 0.8% 254.3 3.2% 3.4 3.6% 15.3 6.7% 63.7 1.6%

East Africa 4,706,287 2.1% 1,331,976 1.8% 3,413.4 5.4% 137.7 1.7% 2.2 2.3% 12.3 5.4% 37.7 0.9%

Southern Africa 4,481,502 2.0% 1,011,631 1.4% 3,348.8 5.3% 76.7 1.0% 0.9 0.9% 7.2 3.1% 11.0 0.3%

Northwest Europe 1,690,784 0.8% 887,473 1.2% 926.2 1.5% 402.7 5.1% 0.2 0.2% 0.2 0.1% 179.3 4.4%

Southwest Europe 4,081,897 1.9% 2,855,365 3.8% 2,317.3 3.7% 667.0 8.4% 0.9 1.0% 29.1 12.7% 216.7 5.4%

Northeast Europe 1,690,784 0.8% 887,473 1.2% 926.2 1.5% 402.7 5.1% 0.2 0.2% 0.2 0.1% 179.3 4.4%

Southeast Europe 4,230,784 1.9% 2,882,089 3.9% 2,585.1 4.1% 667.0 8.4% 0.9 1.0% 29.1 12.7% 216.7 5.4%

South and East Mediterranean 38,202,056 17.4% 21,541,584 28.8% 10,277.9 16.3% 1377.3 17.3% 21.2 22.4% 31.7 13.8% 657.7 16.3%

West Asia 41,284,897 18.8% 19,631,774 26.3% 10,384.3 16.5% 803.7 10.1% 21.7 22.9% 7.9 3.5% 560.7 13.9%

Central Asia 38,135,583 17.4% 18,270,503 24.4% 8,978.6 14.3% 687.3 8.6% 19.8 20.9% 2.6 1.1% 528.7 13.1%

South Asia 30,500,858 13.9% 1,132,309 1.5% 2,118.0 3.4% 539.0 6.8% 3.3 3.5% 2.7 1.2% 180.3 4.5%

East Asia 3,425,034 1.6% 366,636 0.5% 2,606.4 4.1% 226.7 2.8% 2.7 2.9% 3.8 1.6% 252.3 6.3%

Southeast Asia 29,870,111 13.6% 478,056 0.6% 1,867.2 3.0% 517.0 6.5% 2.5 2.6% 2.1 0.9% 172.0 4.3%

Tropical Pacific Region 76,067 0.0% 3,636 0.0% 74.4 0.1% 17.0 0.2% 0.1 0.1% 1.8 0.8% 7.0 0.2%

Not Specified 122,262 0.1% 22,042 0.0% 73.7 0.1% 180.7 2.3% 4.5 4.7% 7.7 3.4% 278.7 6.9%

Primary regions of diversity of crops produced and/or

consumed by Australia

Primary regions of diversity of crops produced by

Australia

Primary regions of diversity of crops consumed by

Australia

Calories

Calories

Global interconnectedness with regard to primary

regions of diversity of crops important in food supplies


Australian national agricultural production - at least 99.9% comprised of crops whose primary regions are elsewhere on the

planet, for all production variables

Global average: 71.0% ± 1.8 for production quantity, 64.0% ± 2.2 for harvested area, and 72.9% ± 1.9 for production value

Production quantity

Degree of production per country of “foreign” crops

Calories

Degree of consumption per country of “foreign” crops

Australian national food supply - 91.8% - 100% of calories are from crops whose primary regions of diversity are elsewhere,

87.2% - 100% of protein, 89.8% - 100% of fat, and 81.1% to 100% of food weight

Global average: 65.8% ± 1.8 for calories, 66.6% ± 2.1 for protein, 73.7% ± 1.6 for fat, and 68.7% ± 1.4 for food weight

Use of “foreign” crops has increased over time

Production systemsFood supplies


Australia benefits from foreign crop genetic diversity

Importance of crops and their coverage in the MLS


Dietary diversity:

Khoury et al. (2014) Increasing homogeneity in global food supplies and the implications for food security. PNAS

111(11): 4001-4006.

Khoury & Jarvis (2014) The Changing Composition of the Global Diet: Implications for CGIAR Research. CIAT Policy Brief No.

18.

Crop Wild Relatives:

Khoury et al.(2015) Crop wild relatives of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]: distributions, ex situ conservation

status, and potential genetic resources for abiotic stress tolerance. Biological Conservation 184: 259-270.

Castañeda-Álvarez et al. (2016) Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. Nature Plants.

doi:10.1038/NPLANTS.2016.22

Interdependence:

Khoury et al. (2015) Estimation of Countries’ Interdependence in Plant Genetic Resources Provisioning National Food Supplies and

Production Systems. International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Research Study 8 (Rome:

FAO).

Khoury et al. (2015) Where our Food Crops Come from: A new estimation of countries’ interdependence in plant genetic resources.

CIAT Policy Brief No. 25.

Thank [email protected]

diversity in global food supplies and the implications for food security

Science